Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Game’ Category

Wrong Name Game

There are essentially two ways available to a man to satisfy a woman’s strong compulsion — call it hypergamy — to relinquish her body and love to a higher status man who is more powerful, in any number of characteristics, than the men in his milieu against whom he competes for the attention of women.

  1. Raise the perception of his SMV. (SMV = sexual market value)
  2. Lower the woman’s perception of her own SMV.

Now, a man can raise how his SMV is perceived by women through objective and subjective means (both are effective, although a good argument can be made that the latter is more enticing as a seduction lure). He can, objectively, increase his mate value by, for example, becoming wealthy or fronting a band in a local club brimming with young cuties.

He can also increase his mate value by learning and acquiring the behavioral traits of an objectively HSMV man that signal to women he too is HSMV. This is the province of Game.

That’s the first option. The second option is the dark art of raising his own SMV by making a woman question her belief in her relative SMV. That is, it’s the art of instilling doubt in a woman about her presumption that she’s out of your league.

Which brings us to today’s topic: Wrong Name Game (WNG for short, daringly sharing an acronym with White Nationalist Game).

Wrong Name Game is a dark art, one of the darker arts of pickup, and also one of the more dangerous to execute with the required level of skillfulness. Failure at WNG will likely blow you out of the running completely.* So, proceed to read with caution.

Reader Observasaurus Rex gives us a perfect anecdote of Wrong Name Game in action,

Girl: Hey I’ve got to (Flaking because reasons).
You: Sure Stacy, catch you later.
Girl: My name’s not Stacy, it’s (whatever).
You: You’re the blonde girl in the sundress from (venue) right?
Girl: No I’m (blah blah blah).
You: k

WNG is used here as an anti-flake tactic, which is how it will be most often used. Obviously, the idea is to make it seem as if you’re juggling so many women you occasionally mix up names (HSMV), and that this particular girl whose name you mistook for some other girl’s name (“Stacy”) didn’t leave much of an impression with you.

So, WNG both raises your perceived SMV and lowers the girl’s self-perceived SMV. It’s a two-fer, and that’s why it is nuclear off the nimble tongue of a smooth operator.

Notice what Observasaurus did here that helped the believability of his WNG:

One, he didn’t make a big production out of addressing this girl by a wrong name. He simply passed it off as a credible oversight tail-ended with a friendly “catch you later”.

Two, when she corrected him, he didn’t immediately lunge into beta-ish apologia for his rudeness. He did the opposite, pressing for more information about her looks/style which forced her into qualifying herself to him.

Three, when the ride was over, he cut it off with a perfunctory “k”, leaving the girl to think that he wasn’t much bothered by having thought she was some other girl.

All these conversational feints — so subtle and brief in execution, which is typical when Game concepts are applied in the real world — came together into a synergistic pairing of his higher SMV to her (now) lowered SMV, and the result is a tiny tingle in her hindbrain telling her that maybe this man is worth getting to know.

*It is VERY easy to fuck up WNG. I don’t recommend inexperienced betas try this, until they have gotten some poon notches to build their inner confidence. There is a lot of opportunity for WNG to backfire, in which you would sound like you deliberately mistook her name, and which will then make you seem like you are head over heels for her. The artistry of WNG is paramount; it demands a near-superhuman affectation of casual, unflustered aloofness.

Read Full Post »

Dr. Giggles draws an astute analogy between the snarky “gotcha questions” that are the empty-headed, but rhetorically potent, semantic weapons of shitlib journalists advocates and the game concept of Beta Bait, which is a form of courtship test that women subconsciously use to smoke out supplicating, sexually thirsty beta males.

It’s amazing how Game is an integral part of a politician’s repertoire. The shitlib’s comments on David Duke wasn’t the only one Trump had to sidestep during the interview. They tried to get him on everything from his personal religious beliefs to his opinions on old controversial topics like Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill. DT didn’t take the bait….Which made me realize these gotcha questions are the same thing as Beta Bait!

Precisely. This is why it’s fair to say male shitlibs are wonanly: they attack using the verbal tactics preferred by women. Low T does that to a man.

The shitlib reporter hit Trump with the dating trap equivalent of a girl asking a man if he’s dating anyone else. “Donald, are you seeing David Duke, or any other proudly White supporters? Because if you are we can’t keep dating.”

Trump handled the David Duke question with his usual ZFG alpha male aplomb. “If it makes you feel better, sure I’ll do that for you…” is a huge neg. He basically called the reporter a wussy who needed a better man to stroke his delicate schoolgirl ego.

Neutralzing shitlib journalist beta bait is the same as neutralizing beta bait from women: Ignore it and plow into your favored topic, or reframe it as evidence of a character deficiency of your interlocutor. Either way, remember rule #1: NEVER APOLOGIZE. This includes never acting defensively, or butthurt with the accusation, or offended that your honor has been besmirched. Own the room, own conversation, own your antagonist.

Shitlib: “Do you agree that this latest tragedy of two white reporters shot dead means that we need stricter gun control?”

A Soldier Of Trump: “That’s interesting. Do you think a gun wrote the killer’s anti-White racist manifesto?”

If you can game women, you can game the leftoid media. If you can game the leftoid media, you win.

Read Full Post »

The Reactionary Tree (Twatter handle @ReactionaryTree) created a trolling campaign that combines White nationalism with Game. Tinder is the medium of choice for the beta testing stage of White Nationalist Game (WNG).

The line used to pick up girls on Tinder is simple, and unambiguous (and goes by the 14/88-evocative name “The 14 Words”).

“We must secure the existence of our people and a future for White Children.”

(The proper noun capitalization of “White Children” elevates this line from mere troll to art form.)

The responses — gathered at 8chan /pol/ — from attractive girls are, perhaps unsurprisingly, very positive. Or at the least very intrigued. (And in the arena of seduction, making a girl curious about you is as good as a win.)

You’ll notice in the above that the man’s reply is much shorter than the woman’s. Laconic Jerkboy Game rape!

Chicks dig a man who makes demands.

Never trust a woman who hates kids. That goes double for white women who only profess love for kids of other races.

“To show importance. With intrigue.” :lol:

Is anyone surprised that an antiracism liberal chick doesn’t want kids? I’m heartened every time I hear one of these conformist dolts swear her everlasting childlessness. Clean out the gene pool of their kind.

This girl qualifies herself HARD. It’s but a short hop to the bedroom when a girl qualifies herself so vehemently to your White standards.

I predict this convo above will excite a few readers to 100+ comment marathons.

My sides… they’re splitting!

Agree and amplify: Game 101.

But this last one might be my favorite:

This post is like some syncretic intersectionality of major, if superficially disparate, Chateau themes.

White Nationalist Game may have been intended as a trolling operation with high comedic value, but in fact many of the responses to it from lovely White women have shown that there’s real Game applicability to mine. WNG demonstrates the value of:

  1. short and sweet replies to girls
  2. never apologizing for your bold anti-sjw pronouncements
  3. qualifying girls
  4. agree&amplify
  5. having a ZERO FUCKS GIVEN alpha male attitude.

How about that. Game can save a future for White Children!

Read Full Post »

“To Be Fair” Game

I have a buddy who says his pickup game boils down to “fatten them up before the kill”. He means by this that he lowers girls’ defenses with stray, off-hand compliments and then, when they’re smiling and acting gracious and conciliatory toward him, he pulls a 180 utilizing a coy “except for” non sequitur and mildly rebukes something about the girl that she prides herself on. The key, he says, is the delivery; he makes it seem like his insults are never intentional. His whole game is essentially an extended-play version of the neg.

I was reminded of this by reader Chad Durbsley, who explains his “to be fair” game which sounds tactically similar to “fatten them up” game.

Update on “gay game”.

Although I’ve been using Internet dating less and less, it’s still worth putting a minute or 2 a day into it depending on where you live, and your skill in spotting undercover fatties.

“Gay profile” gets amazing results. Especially with younger sjw girls with a rainbow profile pic.

Also having great success with “to be fair” game.
I.e. : “to be fair- if your profile was any gayer it would be a power-bottom named Steve”.

The trick here is to use the “to be fair…” and then say something that’s patently *unfair* and also insulting. This short circuits the hamster direct to the pussy.

This is a semantic trick that works surprisingly well. “To be fair” Game is a sneaky false premise verbal sleight, the false premise being that what you are about to say is anything resembling fair. (A cousin of “to be fair,…” is “that said,…”.)

This persuasion technique could be lumped into a school of salesmanship called “relationship building”. It works by presuming, or fast-tracking, a closer, more intimate relationship than actually exists, which in pickup jargon is known as time compression. When you use leading clauses like “to be fair”, you are insinuating yourself into the girl’s circle of trust; you are assuming in effect that you are a fair man, that she knows this, and that anything you say must therefore be weighed more seriously than what any other rando would say.

“Relationship building” goes a lot deeper that that, but don’t underestimate the force that a few well-timed quips can have on a woman’s perception of your mate value. “To be fair” Game would work even better if you “fatten her up” first with a sincere compliment. This is the psychological foundation for the efficacy of the neg. Like Chad said, the blatant contradiction between the declaration of fairness and the unfairness of your comment is just the kind of verbal theatric that drives women crazy with curiosity.

“Love your purple hair!….. To be fair, it does make you look like a gay tranny.”

Read Full Post »

Vox points out that Donald Fucking Trump used a classic game tactic — the neg — on (former) supermodel (and mudshark) Heidi Klum, when he said “she’s great, but no longer a 10”.

You know a man is a mega alpha when a single casual neg directed in an offhand manner at a former supermodel results in two videos and multiple public statements as the woman desperately tries to qualify herself to him.

The tingle-stricken lady doth protest too much.

The sheer incoherence of Klum’s remarks underline the degree to which Trump’s dismissive remark rattled her. That, gentlemen, is how it is done. Identify the insecurity and casually press. You know you’ve hit the nerve when their reaction spans days.

The alpha does not qualify himself to women, ever. He expects women to qualify themselves to him.

ABQ: Always Be Qualifying.

Oh, and ladies, a helpful reminder: If you are a White woman of incomparable beauty, don’t throw your genetic heritage away on a coalburning “F YOU DAD” mission. When you get older and less attractive (as you assuredly will), people will feel less urgency to extend you kindness and deference because your family looks weird and they’ll have doubts about your character. Can I get a two-for-one ‘heh’? Heh.

(Trump’s remark actually straddles the line between a neg and an insult, although a man with as much preselected alpha goodness as Trump has more margin for error in this matter. Nonetheless, I’d still call it a neg, because he did butter her up first before delivering the backhanded compliment.)

***

Also from Vox, another demonstration of the power of Fame Game over women’s attraction triggers.

The best part about Game is watching a girl become “noticeably more interested” in you as you weave your biomechanic magic. It’s very satisfying, even apart from the normal anticipatory excitement that accompanies courtship.

Read Full Post »

wounded warrior
bloodied and calm
a silent storyboard
to her heart embalmed

Reader Noel describes the reactions he got after he injured his hand.

2. observation. conversation starters. I don’t know if CH et al. would classify it under ‘peacocking’. I recently messed up my right hand bad [typing only with left] so had surgery, and now the hand is in a splint. People seem to gravitate to it naturally and start conversations [‘what happened?’] along with eliciting a lot of ‘poor you’ remarks and ‘get well!’ wishes. The handicap is real not apparent like peacocking, and obviously it doesn’t show some evo superiority…but it lubricates social intercourse! surprisingly people are thrown off when i give a non-straightforward answer….i don’t know if it’s my delivery or people in san francisco [where i am] lack a sense of humor….

Don’t underestimate the power of wounded warrior game (of which scar game is a profitable subsidiary). Girls flock to men who look like they’ve stepped out of the beta drone office cubicle to survive a spot of adventure. A man’s injury, or permanent mark of a past injury, is rocket fuel for the female fantasia callosum, which she herself eagerly fills with anticipated tales of ZFG (zero fucks given) alpha rogue exploits.

Your job, should you choose the alpha path, is to strike the incipient fantasy chord always taut and ready for a symphony in her brain with your boning fork. Then, allow her imagination some time to run wild before revealing your secret, which of course you should reveal with the maximum vaginally-approved embellishment.

Why are women intrigued by a man with a scar or a wound?

1. Injuries are evidence of a fighter.

Deep, deeeeeeep, in the female hindbrain there resides a poetess who scribes limpid odes to a man who has taken all comers and emerged victorious. It’s evolution all the way down in this instance; women can’t shake that irrepressible lust for a man who bears evidence of his ability and willingness to physically protect them from danger.

2. Injuries add drama.

All women are drama whores. The difference between women and their love of drama is one of degree, not kind. You have to scale some courtship walls before you can take her on an adventure. Add a scar, and she’ll beg to go on the journey.

3. Injuries are a palimpsest over a soul full of brooding pain.

All women are also nurturers, more or less. The nurse in her begs to tend to your wounded soul, a soul which is easier for her to summon into existence if your body bears the stigmata of real wounds.

4. Injuries are the next best thing to female preselection.

Show up to a club with a beautiful woman in your company and other women in attendance will autonomically experience a swell of desire for you. This is because you are a proven commodity. (Women rely much more on these proxy cues of mate value than do men, who merely require a split second visual appraisal to activate the courtship ritual). An injury or scar works like a beautiful woman, plus the added benefit of an implicit invitation to find out more. Certainly, an omega male loser can have a scar, but women are wired to assume, usually correctly, that scars are most often the badges of men who don’t play marathon video game sessions in gloomy bedrooms or rant ineffectually on male feminist tumblrrheas. As Noel experienced, you will have an incredibly easy time striking up conversations with inquisitive girls if you’re hobbled or engraved with proof of past battles.

Piercings and tattoos are probably a “safe” scar-lite form of mate value enhancement preferred by hipsters and freaks, but now that women have co-opted the same symbols of warriordom they might not be as effective for men. You’ll need the real thing now. Surgically embedded knife wound scars?

PS When a girl asks about your scar or injury, a classic opening reply would be “Ah, it’s complicated.” Sexual innuendo also works, if the moment is appropriate: “Bedroom injury.” Another good reply is to make up an obviously phony reason for it: “Fighting my way out of ISIS captivity”. But I think the most productive reply is one that alludes, loosely, to a troubled time from your past: “I got it a long time ago. It’s not something I like to remember.”

Read Full Post »

Scott Adams wrote a couple of short essays on The Trumpening that are basically recitations of core game concepts (some of which are retrofitted from ideas first introduced by Robert Cialdini in his book Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion). You will find many of Scott’s points, and Trump’s tactics, explained in depth in the CH archives.

Would Trump use his negotiation and persuasion skills in the campaign? Of course he would. And we expect him to do just that. […]

As I said in my How to Fail book, if you are not familiar with the dozens of methods of persuasion that are science-tested, there’s a good chance someone is using those techniques against you.

For example, when Trump says he is worth $10 billion, which causes his critics to say he is worth far less (but still billions) he is making all of us “think past the sale.” The sale he wants to make is “Remember that Donald Trump is a successful business person managing a vast empire mostly of his own making.” The exact amount of his wealth is irrelevant.

When a car salesperson trained in persuasion asks if you prefer the red Honda Civic or the Blue one, that is a trick called making you “think past the sale” and the idea is to make you engage on the question of color as if you have already decided to buy the car. That is Persuasion 101 and I have seen no one in the media point it out when Trump does it.

“Think past the sale” is the same as the game technique known as “assume the sale“. The results of this form of persuasion/seduction are just as predictable: the customer/woman is groomed to believe he/she has already chosen your product/you.

The $10 billion estimate Trump uses for his own net worth is also an “anchor” in your mind. That’s another classic negotiation/persuasion method. I remember the $10 billion estimate because it is big and round and a bit outrageous. And he keeps repeating it because repetition is persuasion too.

I don’t remember the smaller estimates of Trump’s wealth that critics provided. But I certainly remember the $10 billion estimate from Trump himself. Thanks to this disparity in my memory, my mind automatically floats toward Trump’s anchor of $10 billion being my reality. That is classic persuasion. And I would be amazed if any of this is an accident. Remember, Trump literally wrote the book on this stuff.

Anchoring is another insidiously effective game technique. In seduction, anchoring is most effective when a good feeling or evoked emotion is purposefully coupled with a physical touch, so that the woman associates her positive state with her seducer’s presence.

You might be concerned that exaggerating ones net worth is like lying, and the public will not like a liar. But keep in mind that Trump’s value proposition is that he will “Make America Great.” In other words, he wants to bring the same sort of persuasion to the question of America’s reputation in the world. That concept sounds appealing to me. The nation needs good brand management, whether you think Trump is the right person or not.

In game parlance, “branding” is called “creating an identity”, which means adopting some sexy persona that appeals to women.

Trump also said he thinks Mexico should pay for the fence, which made most people scoff. But if your neighbor’s pit bull keeps escaping and eating your rosebushes, you tell the neighbor to pay for his own fence or you will shoot his dog next time you see it.

Scott Adams definitely reads Chateau Heartiste.

On a recent TV interview, the host (I forget who) tried to label Trump a “whiner.” But instead of denying the label, Trump embraced it and said was the best whiner of all time, and the country needs just that. That’s a psychological trick I call “taking the high ground” and I wrote about it in a recent blog post. The low ground in this case is the unimportant question of whether “whiner” is a fair label for Trump. But Trump cleverly took the high ground, embraced the label, and used it to set an anchor in your mind that he is the loudest voice for change. That’s some clown genius for you.

In game parlance, “taking the high ground” means “Agree&Amplify“. Donald F’ing Trump is a skilled Game practitioner. No wonder the women in his life are so beautiful and adore him so deeply.

When Trump raised his hand at the debate as the only person who would not pledge to back the eventual Republican candidate, he sent a message to the party that the only way they can win is by nominating him. And people like to win. It is in their nature.

Trump is a winner. This is why he bugs cuckservatives so much.

And what about Trump’s habit of bluster and self-complimenting? Every time he opens his mouth he is saying something about the Trump brand being fabulous or amazing or great. The rational part of your brain thinks this guy is an obnoxious, exaggerating braggart. But the subconscious parts of your brain (the parts that make most of your decisions) only remember that something about that guy was fabulous, amazing and great.

Game concept: DHVing (demonstrating higher value).

Now that Trump owns FOX, and I see how well his anchor trick works with the public, I’m going to predict he will be our next president.

I don’t know if we’ll have a President Trumpening (in’shallah), but if we do it’ll be because Trump has TIGHT GAME. And balls.

Now, if you can become president using game, imagine how much game could help you clean up with women!

Here’s Scott’s second essay on Trump’s power of persuasion.

My main point is that intellectual arguments lose to visual arguments and to powerful associations such as “America” and “great.” You think Trump is spouting calorie-free non-policies because he’s an idiot who hasn’t done his homework. The reality (as far as I can tell) is that he’s playing three-dimensional chess with two-dimensional opponents.

Beta spergs take note: you will never logically or intellectually stimulate a woman into bed. You have to learn to speak the language of hotnsexynsteamynsensual romance, which is, in fact, as learnable as any rule of logic inquiry.

***

Scott Walker is a niceguy who for the most part has his head on straight, compared to the rest of the cuckservative field. But he is weak. Listen to him feebly try to reason with some mud invader who wants the US to do nothing less than bend over and take his burrito up the keister.

Commenter “Original” writes,

Trump reframes children of illegal immigrants as: “It’s an issue of our countries policies encouraging this behavior.”

Here’s a more powerful reframe: “Anyone who breaks this country’s immigration laws for their own benefit is a delinquent. Shame on all illegals for breaking the law, but especially shame on all illegals who drag their children into their criminal activity.”

The anointed GOP contenders are weak. This is why they fail. And this is why Trump wins.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,326 other followers

%d bloggers like this: